PokerTDA

POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: K-Lo on April 30, 2012, 12:40:31 PM

Title: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on April 30, 2012, 12:40:31 PM
Hi all:

I thought it would be nice to get some opinions on this interesting scenario that Matt Savage raised on this twitter feed recently:

"Blinds 100-200, called in two spots, gets back to BB who pulls out 200 and throws in a single 500 chip?"

After polling his followers, it appears that opinion was split between determining that it was a call vs a raise, with a slight favor to it being a call. 

I thought these main points in favor of a call were interesting:
- The fact that most people cannot agree already suggest that the betting is unclear.  So if it is not clear, revert to lowest 'amount' for action (i.e. check).
- One could reasonably argue for a different interpretation of the 500 chip - asking for change.  Particularly since if the player had swapped the 500 chip before the action came to him, that would most likely be taken for simply asking for change, rather than a raise action out of turn.

I thought these main points in favor of a raise were interesting:
- When put out in turn, the additional wager action is clearly a bet of the oversized chip amount, even without a verbal declaration
- TDA Rule 38 on Oversized Chip wagering sets out that when "not facing a bet or a blind", the bet is the maximum amount of that chip, and the BB is not facing a bet or a blind if his options are to check or raise.

I do admit that the action reeks of lack of clarity, but on the other hand, the wording of the TDA rule appears relevant.  Thoughts?

Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on April 30, 2012, 02:50:09 PM
K-Lo,
 Interesting, indeed. I would call it a raise because the only time a player can go into the betting area a take back his chips is when he is changing-up. The best example is blinds of 50 and 100, and the SB removes his two 25's and puts a 100 count chip in the pot to call the BB.  The player was already in for all bets, so what else was he doing? Sorry, too much thought into the technical end of rules. I'll bet the player's intention was to raise, correct? The key word is; intention. I rule a 300 raise to a total of the value of the single chip. Period! Perhaps some of these joker's will make their intentions clear when betting and raising. You can't put that player in a position that could induce a re-raise from the next player, only to have the BB say he was looking for change, and did not want to raise? Sorry, not at my table.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: chet on April 30, 2012, 05:42:13 PM
Nick:  Got to agree with you on this one.  It is definitely a raise.  The only thing in question, in my mind, is the amount of the raise.  It could be 400 or 500.  The OP did not specify if this was a Limit or a No-Limit game.  If Limit, then the raise is to 400.  If No-Limit then I could agree with a raise to 500.  That said, if there are those that think the BB action is unclear (which I don't), I might be convinced to hold the BB to the minimum of 400.

Chet
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on April 30, 2012, 06:25:39 PM
Chet,
 Very good answer. I'm always assuming that the game is no limit. A raise is what I'd call it, for sure. It's amazing how much I disagree with so many TD's... ::)
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: W0lfster on May 01, 2012, 11:03:42 AM
Im a bit confused sorry, doesnt an oversized chip without verbal declaration mean a call?
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: chet on May 01, 2012, 01:48:38 PM
Wolfster:  Did you read the whole question or just the part about the oversize chip?

The player is in the BB and posted his BB of 200.  When the action gets back to that player, he pulls his 200 BB back and replaces it with a single 500 chip.

In my opinion this is vastly different than the player who is not in the blind and places a single oversize chip into the pot.  That is clearly a call, lacking any verbal statement otherwise. 

There is no point whatsoever in the player pulling back his BB since he did not need change for the SB next hand unless he intended to raise.  This assumes that he used multiple chips for the BB.  However, I don't know of any place that uses 200 chips, so back to my original answer, raise!
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 01, 2012, 01:50:34 PM
Wolfster,
 Why did the player put in the 500? What was his intention for putting in the oversize chip, if not to raise? He was in for the full amount already.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: W0lfster on May 01, 2012, 03:50:05 PM
fair enough, it makes more sense now but if he hadnt taken his 200 back and thrown in the 500 chip to 700 total without verbal declaration would that be different? A call?
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 01, 2012, 04:16:09 PM
Wolfster,

 Come on Wolf...it would be a raise to 700 in a no limit game. That's for sure.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Stuart Murray on May 02, 2012, 06:19:49 AM
This one has to be based on intent also, most of the time though I would let it go as a raise to 500 total.

Regards
Stuart
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on May 02, 2012, 06:29:18 PM
So... it is interesting that a lot of replies here lean more towards "raise" than "call".  I would tend to agree, although Matt and 50%+ of his followers lean towards a call.

Let's talk about the relevance of 'intention' a bit more...

Scenario #2:

Blinds are 200-400.  UTG raises to 1200.  Action folds to player A who throws in one 5000 chip with two 100 chips.  Dealer rules this as a raise, floor is called.  It is explained that the three chips were thrown in without a verbal declaration.  Players insists that he thought the 5000 chip was a 1000 chip, and the intention was to call, not raise.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 02, 2012, 08:36:06 PM
K-Lo,
 My first reaction, as a dealer, would be to announce raise, "total 5200" or "re-raise 4000 more!" If the player that made the mistake corrected the error before another player acted, a decision could be made either way. This, however is much different from the original scenario where the player in question was in for all bets. Tournament rules would lean more in the direction of forcing the player to commit to the unintentional raise...that's what I don't like about tournaments.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Spence on May 05, 2012, 04:16:22 PM
In the inital question I agree that it is a raise as well. 500 is the bet.
As for Scenario #2: Under normal circumstances I am inclined to say this is a raise. However, at my current establishment we do not have the denominations on our touranment chips. This leads to a lot of confusion for newer players and we often have to give the benefit of the doubt. I rule with Nick here. If no other player has acted then the raise can be corrected.
This thread seems to be mostly falling towards the intent of the player which is largely unlike us in past threads. Many of us seem to be inclined to follow letter of the law rather than what the players intent was because we can be somewhat exploited through that. In this circumstance though I think that we need to be cautious of what the players intentions are and simply state Rule #1 if necessary. I'd rather not be tied to giving everyone a second chance because we mandate a rule about intention or one of our rulings gets construed that players might get a "freebie". Yes intention counts, but it puts you are at the mercy of the TD
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on May 07, 2012, 07:06:46 AM
I really like your reply, Spence.  Here are my thoughts generally along the same lines.

I admit that I am one of the less lenient ones -- particularly in situations like the 5200 one where the "fix" is so easy... if a player could have simply verbalized the amount of the bet/raise and that statement would have prevented the 'irregularity' from occurring, and no one else (dealer/player) was at fault, I don't usually feel justified in making exceptions.  By ruling strictly, there is less of a subjective element to decision making, less risk of being accused of favouritism, and doing so is more likely to result in more consistent rulings.  The supposed 'intent' of the player is an important factor, but not always the defining one IMO, especially if the 'intent' is only made clear after some after-the-fact explanation by the player when the visual evidence of the wager contradicts the supposed true intention, and objectively the action at issue cannot be seen as a clear mistake.  If the bettor's true intent were the only consideration, then we would not even have such well-established rules as the single oversized chip rule.

That being said, the situation in the original post is different from the 5200 case, in my opinion.  We are not talking about a situation where the intent of the player is at odds with what the bet would visually indicate to players without any further explanation.  The true intent of the player here is more likely a raise to 500 than something else contrived like asking for change, and the bet of 500 that remains in front of the player looks like a 500 bet to any observer.  The fact that these are consistent should be given significant weight, and it makes sense to me to lean towards ruling this as 500 unless there is a rule that clearly would suggest the outcome should be different. Contrary to the people who voted the action as being a call (largely citing the oversized chip rule but not really thinking about the purpose of the rule), I don't think the single oversized chip rule being a call clearly covers this situation because there is no outstanding bet to be called. You have to force a creative interpretation of the BB "calling zero" to try to get the rule to apply.  IMO, the spirit of the single oversized chip rule is not in play here.  Therefore, it makes sense to me that the raise should be to 500, and I don't see why this wouldn't be a fair outcome.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 07, 2012, 12:46:20 PM
K-Lo,
 I like it when we agree. IMO, the original situation should not be governed by the oversize chip rule, as you so eloquently stated.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Spence on May 07, 2012, 04:33:46 PM
It seems so odd to me that we are all agreeing on the bet being a raise. Why is it that Matt and his twitter followers would rule exactly the opposite? There must be information we are missing to have such incongruous rulings from the same scenario. Moreso the fact that Matt is one of our founding members. Anyone else see this as odd?
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 07, 2012, 08:06:44 PM
Spence,
 Unfortunately, there are many situations that we have differing opinions on. IMO, it's because of the way the rules are written. They are too vague and open to conjecture.
 
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on May 08, 2012, 11:51:16 AM
It seems so odd to me that we are all agreeing on the bet being a raise. Why is it that Matt and his twitter followers would rule exactly the opposite? There must be information we are missing to have such incongruous rulings from the same scenario. Moreso the fact that Matt is one of our founding members. Anyone else see this as odd?

No, it was very a simple question.  But don't forget that most of his followers are players, and a lot of them just vaguely know there's a single chip rule generally.  Matt's point was that in situations like these, he would give weight to the "majority rule"  when the situation is unclear.  He brought up the fact that if the big blind did this before it was his turn to act, that no one would rule that as a raise out of turn, but rather clearly a call. 

Personally, I don't think there is a clarity issue.  We are comparing apples and oranges.  The fact that the player is doing the exchange in turn signifies an intention to raise much more clearly than the hypothetical out of turn exchange.   Bringing in the out of turn scenario is just a red herring.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 08, 2012, 09:03:14 PM
Here we are on page #2 and the consensus is: You can call it any way you'd like. This is not good.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Kerry DeVore on May 22, 2012, 09:43:09 PM
OK. No limit game. Blinds 100 200. Assuming position one is the SB, position 2 is BB and so on. Position 3 folds, postion 4 calls 200. Position 5 calls 200 Position 5 throws in a 500 chip without any verbal or physical indication it is a raise, Position 6 throws in 200 but Position 5 objects saying he raised. I ruled Position 5 bet was a call. Was I right?
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 23, 2012, 06:13:00 AM
Welcome to the forum! Yes Kerry, without declaring a raise prior to the chip hitting the table, it can only be a call. This is the single oversize chip rule.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on May 23, 2012, 06:30:47 AM
Agreed with Nick.  This is one of the most common rulings that you will make. 
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: PokerChip on May 29, 2012, 02:26:21 PM
I just posted the same question not knowing that this thread was going, but here is my confusion.

Rules are NOT supposed to be up for interpretation; however, it appears that is what is happening here. The Oversized rule states that when a single chip is thrown in without a declaration, then it is considered a call. Why then would we allow a raise even though a player pulls back his BB? If the rule is hard and fast and not subject to interpretation, then a single chip thrown in SHOULD be a call? We can't interpret that the player MEANT to raise if he throws in a single chip?

We had this situation last night and it would be great to have some real clarity here.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 29, 2012, 06:03:43 PM
Pokerchip,
 If I can try to better explain with one more example: If the player were on the small blind and he retracted his bet and replaced it with a larger denomination chip, it would be a call. If the player were on the big blind (with no raises) retracting his big blind and putting a larger denomination chip is a raise...why else would he make such a move?
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on May 29, 2012, 10:32:40 PM
Rules are NOT supposed to be up for interpretation; however, it appears that is what is happening here. The Oversized rule states that when a single chip is thrown in without a declaration, then it is considered a call. (my emphasis)

Pokerchip:  I understand your frustration, and hence my original post.  A few comments though.  

You say that the "Oversized rule states that when a single chip is thrown in without a declaration, then it is considered a call", and that the rule should be applied 'hard and fast' and not be subject to interpretation.  However, note that the rule as written doesn't say exactly that.

38:   Oversized Chip Betting
Anytime when facing a bet or blind, placing a single oversized chip in the pot is a call if a raise isn’t first verbally declared. [...] When not facing a bet, placing an oversized chip in the pot without declaration is a bet of the maximum for the chip.

(emphasis added)

This is TDA Rule 38.  There are similar provisions in all the other major rulebooks.

According to a strict reading of the rule, note that the single chip without a verbal declaration is a call only when facing a bet or a blind.  Note that it doesn't say that the single chip without a verbal declaration is a call always or "in all circumstances".  On the contrary - the rule itself provides a very specific condition that must satisfied before the general statement that you gave applies.

So this begs the question:  when you are in the BB, and everyone limps to you, are you "facing a bet"?  Are you "facing a blind"?  Is it clear, and can you apply this rule 'hard and fast'?  Note that if everyone limps to you in the BB -- your only options are to check or raise, not to "call" (unless you think 'check' means "call zero", which itself involves a creative "interpretation" of "check").  

It is different when someone has put out a bet post-flop and you are faced with the decision to call it or not, or you are not in the blinds and are faced with the decision of whether to call the blind or not pre-flop. In those situations, there actually is a bet or blind to be called.

It has also been pointed out that the rule actually says that "when not facing a bet", the oversized chip without declaration is the maximum for the chip.  When someone checks to you post-flop and you throw out a 500 chip, you are clearly betting 500.  You are not "calling zero" there.  So when everyone limps to the Big Blind pre-flop, and the Big Blind has no bet to "call" since he can only check or raise, doesn't this part of the rule apply?

And so there we have the dilemma.

I agree with you that rules are ideally clear enough that they need not be subject to "interpretation", meaning that they can be applied strictly.  But it's not always as easy as one might think, and that is why when the answer is not clear cut for a given rule, we have to take into account a variety of factors to try to come up with a ruling that would appear to be the most fair --- or put forward a change in the rule so that no "interpretation" is required.  In fact, perhaps because of our discussion here, we might see the rule clarified in the future.

For this particular rule, I think one of the big problems is that much of the general public thinks that the rule simply says "single chip = call", because that is easy to remember. And it clearly applies 95% of the time, so there is rarely an issue.  But in my opinion, it is an inaccurate generalization of the actual rule.  For that 5% of the time where it isn't clear how the actual rule should be applied, because for example we don't know if the BB's option to check or raise can be equated with "facing a bet or a blind", we are left doing what we are doing now -- trying to work out what the ruling should be in a principled and fair manner, and seeing if the majority of experienced TDs will see the problem (and the solution) in the same way.

Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: PokerChip on May 30, 2012, 07:16:21 AM
K-Lo, i must admit that you make a very compelling argument for why this particular situation is a Raise as opposed to a Call. I have to agree with your logic that the BB's only option is to either raise or check and by throwing out a larger denomination chip, this could signify a raise. Now... if the BB leaves his $100 out there and just throws in a $500 chip, does this also constitute a raise? I suppose the answer is yes.

Really good discussion and worth bringing up at the next TDA meeting.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: PokerChip on May 30, 2012, 09:50:29 AM
OK... Next question in this same venue...

1) Blinds are 50/100. Small Blind tosses in a 500 chip and AFTER THE CHIP HITS THE TABLE (albeit a second or two), pulls back his 50 SB. Call or raise?

2) Blinds are 50/100. Small blind pulls back his 50 and THEN tosses in a 500 chip. Call or raise?

2) Blinds are 50/100. Small Blind tosses in a 500 chip, but leaves his SB in the pot. Call or raise?

Thanks for an interesting thread.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Brian Vickers on May 30, 2012, 10:15:30 AM
OK... Next question in this same venue...

1) Blinds are 50/100. Small Blind tosses in a 500 chip and AFTER THE CHIP HITS THE TABLE (albeit a second or two), pulls back his 50 SB. Call or raise?

2) Blinds are 50/100. Small blind pulls back his 50 and THEN tosses in a 500 chip. Call or raise?

2) Blinds are 50/100. Small Blind tosses in a 500 chip, but leaves his SB in the pot. Call or raise?

Thanks for an interesting thread.

Call
Call
Call
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on May 30, 2012, 10:17:45 AM
if the BB leaves his $100 out there and just throws in a $500 chip, does this also constitute a raise? I suppose the answer is yes.

I agree.  I will rule this a raise 100% of the time.

1) Blinds are 50/100. Small Blind tosses in a 500 chip and AFTER THE CHIP HITS THE TABLE (albeit a second or two), pulls back his 50 SB. Call or raise?

2) Blinds are 50/100. Small blind pulls back his 50 and THEN tosses in a 500 chip. Call or raise?

2) Blinds are 50/100. Small Blind tosses in a 500 chip, but leaves his SB in the pot. Call or raise?

I would rule the 1) scenario a call.  In that case, the small blind actually faces a bet, and he can either call, fold or raise.  He must call at least 50 depending on the preceding action. Tossing in the 500 chip with the 50 still in the pot, without verbal declaration, is a call.  Specifically, it is a call of 50 (or more if the pot was raised). 

The second one is a bit trickier, but in my view, the same principle applies.  The action to the sb is to call at least 50.  In this case, a single denomination chip is a call of that amount, in the absence of a verbal declaration to raise. 

The third one is ruled the same as 1) effectively.  It is 50 to call, and the single oversized chip is "call 50". 

Technically, the small blind that was posted is actually already in the communal pot, and isn't really available to be taken back by players even though we leave it in front of players as a "reminder".  In all of the last three cases then, the sb must call an outstanding bet or a portion of it, and thus an oversized chip is only a call in all of these cases.  The player reaching back into the pot is a bit of a red herring IMO.  Contrast this to the big blind case where call is not an option if no one raises.

These are my thoughts.  I am sure other TDs will chime in.

k
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 30, 2012, 10:22:38 AM
PokerChip,
 
 I can only tell you the calls that I would make. I am not in agreement with K-Lo on this one.

 #1 As a dealer, I would announce "raise" because the proper procedure is to remove your undersized SB before tossing the over-sized chip into the pot. If the action were corrected before the next player reacts, I might allow the player to call, if that were his intent. You can see how complicated some of these situations can become. A warning to the player that he must make his intention clear usually is enough to prevent the same from happening again.

 #2 This is a call because he is facing an increase to complete the BB amount.

 #3 I would consider this a definite intent to raise. Like I said before, players must learn that there are consequences to their unclear actions.  
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Brian Vickers on May 31, 2012, 12:08:42 PM
I rule a call in all 3 cases because in every case, he is facing a bet of 50 (the difference he owed) and so the 500 is going on top of a 50-to-call bet, thus the overchip rule applies.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on May 31, 2012, 09:18:25 PM
Gentlemen,

 When you are on the SB, (with blinds 50/100), do you expect me to believe that you toss a 500 chip into the pot without removing your 50 and expect the dealer to consider that a call?

 There are two solutions to this problem: #1 Stop players from touching any chips in the betting area, or #2 Make each player announce whatever the hell they are doing!
If they insist on making the dealers mind-readers, they should be prepared to suffer the consequences from their unclear actions! I know how difficult it can be for some players to say "call" or "raise." ::)
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: diz475 on June 20, 2012, 01:01:48 PM
i agree with K-LO the big blind has nothing to call so he is making a bet with a single chip. its a raise

and yes when the sb has 50 in and adds a single 500 doller chip to his 50,  its just a call of 100, this is one of the situations you know (or think you know) what he wanted to do but you are much better sticking to the rule then trying to decide what the guy wanted to do this will cause you to have problems down the road
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on July 05, 2012, 06:15:52 AM
Hi all:

I think it is generally accepted now that tossing in a single "oversized" chip in the SB, without a verbal declaration, is considered only a call and not a raise.  (Nick - I know you expressed some doubts above, but you did agree in an earlier post: http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=162.0, so I'm going to choose to rely on the old Nick... lol).  

The classic example is:  Blinds are 50/100, action folds around to SB, and it is 50 for the SB to call. SB throws in a 500 chip without a verbal declaration (leaving the 50 in front) - this is a call, and not a raise to 550, applying the oversized chip rule.

I'd like to explore the application of the "oversized" chip rule to blind situations a little more.  What does a single "oversized" chip mean to you?

Example 1:  *edited*

Blinds are 150/300.  The small blind has posted one 500 chip and awaits change.  Action folds around to the small blind.  Although he has a 500 chip out in front, only 150 is bound to the pot and it is 150 more for the SB to call.  

The small blind tosses in a single 100 chip (the 500 is still out in front).  Call?  Or Raise to 600?

Example 2:

Blinds are 600/1200.  The small blind has posted one 1000 chip in front and awaits change.  Action folds around to the small blind.  Although he has a 1000 chip out in front, only 600 is bound to the pot and it is 600 for the SB to call.

The small blind tosses in two 500 chips (the 1000 is still out in front).  Is this considered a raise attempt (albeit insufficient and must topped up to 2400)?  Or does the multiple same-denomination chip apply here (Rule 40)?

Example 3:

Blinds are 25/25.  Action folds around to the small blind.  The small blind is given an option to raise (he can only check or raise here).  The small blind tosses in a 100 chip.  Raise to 125?
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on July 05, 2012, 09:16:47 AM
K-Lo,

 Example #1 Raise

             #2 Raise

             #3 Raise
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: chet on July 05, 2012, 10:09:40 AM
Guys:

Example 1.  How in the world can this be a raise?  The SB is 300 and the BB is 600.  The SB has a single 500 chip in as his SB and when it is his turn he adds a single 100 chip making the total 600 (the amount of the BB).  This has to be a call since the minimum raise is to a total of 1200.

I agree that 2 and 3 should be a raise.

Chet
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: K-Lo on July 05, 2012, 11:09:49 AM
Guys:

Example 1.  How in the world can this be a raise?  The SB is 300 and the BB is 600.  The SB has a single 500 chip in as his SB and when it is his turn he adds a single 100 chip making the total 600 (the amount of the BB).  This has to be a call since the minimum raise is to a total of 1200.

I agree that 2 and 3 should be a raise.

Chet

Oops.  My bad.  I corrected the scenario.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on July 05, 2012, 11:53:09 AM
I don't know what was messed up, but from what I see it's still a raise.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: chet on July 05, 2012, 12:16:15 PM
For the corrected example, I agree it is then a raise. 

Back to the original example, I need Nick to explain why adding a single 100 chip makes this a raise.  If the BB is 600 doesn't the minimum raise have to be to a total of 1200?  Isn't the SB adding 100 to his posted 500 (he has 200 change coming) for a total of 600 just a call?  What else can he do to call, wait until the dealer gives him his 200 change and then add the single 100 chip to the change for a total of 600?  Seems kind of ridiculous to me to have to go through all that.

Chet
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Nick C on July 05, 2012, 02:11:15 PM
Chet,

 I'm sorry, I don't know what the original was. It's been changed. If you are correct about the blinds being 300/600, then of course it is only a call. I've read K-Lo's question again and I see nothing wrong with my answer. The reason for the confusion is the lack of clarification from the players that insist on not saying what they're doing. IMO, if you don't remove the improper amount in the betting area, before putting the proper amount into the pot, you are adding to the total intended bet amount.
 When I'm dealing, I can tell you this, I have no problem clarifying the bet of player A before Player B acts.
Title: Re: Use of oversized chip in the BB
Post by: Kerry DeVore on July 07, 2012, 11:15:41 PM
Thanks for the info. As for the continuing discussion I pretty much get about 90% of the same players all the time and I still get some arguments about if it is a call or raise. But I haven't got any since I posted a flyer on the wall of the place we play that says "1 oversized chip is a call." Guess you can "train" players how the house plays.